On 29/11/13 18:05, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 29/11/2013 16:10, clipka nous fit lire :
>> Am 29.11.2013 13:09, schrieb Le_Forgeron:
>>
> 
>>>   2. what is the intended effect ?
>>
>> The intended effect of the feature per se is to make a given object
>> appear to be present in the scene only during a part of the exposure time.
>>
>> Thus, besides motion blur, it could also be used to simulate double
>> exposure. E.g. you might add a "gost" to the image, an object that is
>> transparent with respect to the remainder of the scene but opaque when
>> it comes to occluding itself.
> 
>> Maybe I'll go for "ghost" in the end.
>>
> 
> Yes! ghost is perfect. See how you explained it. "ghost" is the natural
> term that you came with, and it explains very well the effect.
> 
> I was assuming a moving blur due to the multiple instance showed, not
> realising it had to be explicitly repeated.
> 
> Go For ghost!
> 
> (Not to be confused with ghoti, which would be pronounced as fish.)
> 

See: http://ncf.idallen.com/english.html

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message